welovetrump--2020-08-13--Florida Sheriff Bans Wearing Masks

Florida Sheriff Bans Wearing Masks

Yes , you read that headline right !
The sheriff of Marion County Florida is quoted saying “ So , as for us , my order will stand as is when you are on-duty/working as my employee and representing my Office – masks will not be worn , ” This has sparked major controversy in the State of Florida and on the national level .
CBS News had this to say about Sheriff Billy Wood ’ s decision : Marion County Sheriff Billy Woods has instructed employees of his office , in Florida , not to wear masks when they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ This is no longer a debate nor is it up for discussion , ” he said in an email to employees .
Woods noted the mayor of Ocala , which is the largest city in Florida ’ s Marion County , vetoed a mask mandate that was recently passed by the city council .
He said the veto is expected to be overruled but that the ordinance exempts government entities , leaving the decision of whether or not to mandate masks to the figure heads .
“ So , as for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is when you are on-duty/working as my employee and representing my Office – masks will not be worn , ” Woods wrote in his email , which was sent to CBS News on Wednesday by the Marion County Sheriff ’ s Office public information director .
Employees , however , can wear “ only pre-approved masks ” in some cases : if HR instructs them to , and if they are at hospitals , the courthouse , the jail , or public or private schools that have mask mandates for students .
Deputies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in case they have to respond to a nursing home or assisted living facility , a known COVID-19 address alert from dispatch , or a call that involves a high-risk elderly individual , Woods said .
“ For all of these exceptions , the moment that enforcement action is to be taken and it requires you to give an individual orders/commands to comply , the mask will be immediately removed , ” Woods ’ email reads .
He said deputies should not wear masks at any special event or special detail .
Fox @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the face mask ban : Marion County Sheriff Billy Woods is making national headlines after forbidding his deputies and visitors to the sheriff ’ s office from wearing face masks , according to a memo he released .
This after Florida reported its largest single-day jump in deaths yet on Tuesday .
FOX 35 obtained the memo on Wednesday .
In it , Sheriff Woods says that “ effective immediately , any individual walking into any one of our lobbies ( which includes the main office and all district offices ) that is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remove it.
” He added that “ in light of the current events when it comes to the sentiment and/or hatred toward law enforcement in our country today , this is being done to ensure there is clear communication and for identification purposes of any individual walking into a lobby.
” The email concluded with Woods saying “ this is no longer a debate nor is it up for discussion .
Please keep in mind this entire pandemic is fluid and constantly changing the way things are done .
However , my orders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be swift to address.
” I have a feeling this won ’ t be the last time we hear from Marion County , Florida .
In the upcoming days , I ’ m sure some employees will defy the Sheriff ’ s ban and it will make national headlines .
Do you think the sheriff has gone too far ?

We may receive compensation from affiliate partners for some links on this site. Read our full Disclosure here
3,306 views
Yes, you read that headline right! The sheriff of Marion County Florida is quoted saying “So, as for us, my order will stand as is when you are on-duty/working as my employee and representing my Office – masks will not be worn,”
This has sparked major controversy in the State of Florida and on the national level.
The sheriff of Marion County, in which part of The Villages lies, has banned mask-wearing by deputies & sheriff's office visitors following a phone conversation with President Trump https://t.co/r8Zwj9QeeK — Timothy Burke (@bubbaprog) August 12, 2020
Florida sheriff bans employees from wearing a mask.
So, if you were pulled over by an officer not wearing a mask, would you roll down the window? https://t.co/618qIwsNV7 — Jayne Miller (@jemillerwbal) August 13, 2020
Marion Co. Sheriff Billy Woods has ordered his deputies, office employees not to wear masks while on duty. https://t.co/hCYkmeLL6t — CBS4 Miami (@CBSMiami) August 13, 2020
CBS News had this to say about Sheriff Billy Wood’s decision:
Marion County Sheriff Billy Woods has instructed employees of his office, in Florida, not to wear masks when they are on duty, barring some exceptions. “This is no longer a debate nor is it up for discussion,” he said in an email to employees. Woods noted the mayor of Ocala, which is the largest city in Florida’s Marion County, vetoed a mask mandate that was recently passed by the city council. He said the veto is expected to be overruled but that the ordinance exempts government entities, leaving the decision of whether or not to mandate masks to the figure heads. “So, as for us, my order will stand as is when you are on-duty/working as my employee and representing my Office – masks will not be worn,” Woods wrote in his email, which was sent to CBS News on Wednesday by the Marion County Sheriff’s Office public information director. Employees, however, can wear “only pre-approved masks” in some cases: if HR instructs them to, and if they are at hospitals, the courthouse, the jail, or public or private schools that have mask mandates for students. Deputies should also carry masks while on patrol in case they have to respond to a nursing home or assisted living facility, a known COVID-19 address alert from dispatch, or a call that involves a high-risk elderly individual, Woods said. “For all of these exceptions, the moment that enforcement action is to be taken and it requires you to give an individual orders/commands to comply, the mask will be immediately removed,” Woods’ email reads. He said deputies should not wear masks at any special event or special detail.
Mask battle wages on as Florida sheriff bans them for employees. @VictorOquendo has the story. https://t.co/izRAUW5hlr pic.twitter.com/kUxXdnZkFK — Good Morning America (@GMA) August 13, 2020
Fox 13 News had this to say about the face mask ban:
SIGN THE PETITION: We Need National Voter ID! Marion County Sheriff Billy Woods is making national headlines after forbidding his deputies and visitors to the sheriff’s office from wearing face masks, according to a memo he released. This after Florida reported its largest single-day jump in deaths yet on Tuesday. FOX 35 obtained the memo on Wednesday. In it, Sheriff Woods says that “effective immediately, any individual walking into any one of our lobbies (which includes the main office and all district offices) that is wearing a mask will be asked to remove it.” He added that “in light of the current events when it comes to the sentiment and/or hatred toward law enforcement in our country today, this is being done to ensure there is clear communication and for identification purposes of any individual walking into a lobby.” The email concluded with Woods saying “this is no longer a debate nor is it up for discussion. Please keep in mind this entire pandemic is fluid and constantly changing the way things are done. However, my orders will be followed or my actions will be swift to address.”
I have a feeling this won’t be the last time we hear from Marion County, Florida. In the upcoming days, I’m sure some employees will defy the Sheriff’s ban and it will make national headlines. Do you think the sheriff has gone too far?


welovetrump--2020-08-13--Double-amputee Veteran Skydives with a Giant American Flag and Trump 2020 Parachute

Never let any difficulties hold you back in life , Sgt .
1st class Dana Bowman is a prime example .
Sgt .
1st class Dana Bowman , is a former Special Forces member and a member of the very notable Golden Knight ’ s parachute team , which is also how he lost his legs in a sky diving accident while training .
That didn ’ t hold him back , after his accident he became the first double-amputee to reenlist and since then has made thousands of jumps .
Fox News Reported Bowman ’ s Jump and had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two prosthetic legs jumped out of an airplane to carry a huge American flag down to the 80th Sturgis Motorcycle Rally in South Dakota over the weekend .
Sgt .
1st Class Dana Bowman , is a former Special Forces soldier and a member of the Army ’ s Golden Knights parachute team , which is also how he lost his legs .
He suffered the injuries in a mid-air collision during a Golden Knights training incident that left a fellow skydiver dead .
According to the Defense Department , he was the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 4,000 jumps under his belt , many of them after the accident , according to Black Hills Fox , a South Dakota station .
He told the outlet he does the jumps to inspire other veterans .
“ You know it is so exhilarating to be an inspiration to a lot of them , ” he said .
“ Some are looking for hope .
Hope for despondent , courage to the timid , and strength to the weak.
” His jump coincided with the arrival of the Sturgis Rally ’ s Veterans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rally Friday .
The event runs until Aug. 16 and is expected to draw about 250,000 visitors amid the coronavirus pandemic – compared to about 500,000 in an average year .
Still , it ’ s expected to become one of the largest public gatherings since the outbreak began .
Local officials scaled back the event , canceling city-hosted aspects and cutting spending on advertisements due to the COVID-19 crisis .
They also plan to conduct mass testing on visitors to get an idea of the virus ’ impact on the rally .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
1st class Bowman making a jump : Kota TV also covered Bowman ’ s jump and had this to say : Bikers rolled into Indian Motorcycle in Sturgis as part of the Veterans ride to help kick off the 80th Sturgis Rally .
While Another veteran — who has spent a lot of time in the air — dropped in to share his story .
Sergeant First Class Dana Bowman has done over 4,000 parachute jumps from an airplane , and today he parachuted in with the American Flag at the Veterans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , veterans , or soldiers have done for us we wouldn ’ t have our freedom .
And that ’ s why we ’ re here in Sturgis today , ” Bowman said .
Despite having so many jumps under his belt , Bowman still finds jumps like these during the rally to be especially moving .
” You know it is so exhilarating to be an inspiration to a lot of them , ” Bowman said .
“ Some are looking for hope .
Hope for despondent , courage to the timid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bowman himself isn ’ t only a vet but suffered a horrific injury while serving his country .
“ Way back in 1994 , I was in a mid-air collision on the Army Parachute Team , The Golden Knights , ” Bowman said .
“ A mid-air collision that took the life of my teammate and both of my legs , ” Bowman said .
With his fellow veterans there to catch the American Flag he parachuted in with before it touched the ground , Bowman is standing proud in the city of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to bring in the American Flag , you think about what our veterans have down for us , sacrificing and supporting and defending the Constitution of the United States of America it means an awful lot , ” Bowman said .
Sgt .
Bowman is truly an American hero , who continually show ’ s his support to a country he gave so much to .
Veterans around the States have been inspired by his testimony .
It ’ s truly refreshing to see someone fly the red , white , and blue @ @ @ @ @

We may receive compensation from affiliate partners for some links on this site. Read our full Disclosure here
353 views
Never let any difficulties hold you back in life, Sgt. 1st class Dana Bowman is a prime example.
Sgt. 1st class Dana Bowman, is a former Special Forces member and a member of the very notable Golden Knight’s parachute team, which is also how he lost his legs in a sky diving accident while training.
That didn’t hold him back, after his accident he became the first double-amputee to reenlist and since then has made thousands of jumps.
Sergeant First Class Dana Bowman has done over 4,000 parachute jumps from an airplane, and today he parachuted in with the American Flag at the Veterans Ride. https://t.co/pxzdif89qZ — WNDU (@WNDU) August 11, 2020
"You know it is so exhilarating to be an inspiration to a lot of them,” he said. “Some are looking for hope. Hope for despondent, courage to the timid, and strength to the weak.” https://t.co/P8kYYkoWl8 — FOX 32 News (@fox32news) August 12, 2020
According to the Defense Department, he was the first double-amputee to reenlist, too. https://t.co/KzsgJoOWx3 — FOX6 News (@fox6now) August 12, 2020
Fox News Reported Bowman’s Jump and had this to say:
A skydiver with two prosthetic legs jumped out of an airplane to carry a huge American flag down to the 80th Sturgis Motorcycle Rally in South Dakota over the weekend. Sgt. 1st Class Dana Bowman, is a former Special Forces soldier and a member of the Army’s Golden Knights parachute team, which is also how he lost his legs. He suffered the injuries in a mid-air collision during a Golden Knights training incident that left a fellow skydiver dead. According to the Defense Department, he was the first double-amputee to reenlist. He has 4,000 jumps under his belt, many of them after the accident, according to Black Hills Fox, a South Dakota station. He told the outlet he does the jumps to inspire other veterans. “You know it is so exhilarating to be an inspiration to a lot of them,” he said. “Some are looking for hope. Hope for despondent, courage to the timid, and strength to the weak.” His jump coincided with the arrival of the Sturgis Rally’s Veterans Ride, to help kick off the rally Friday. The event runs until Aug. 16 and is expected to draw about 250,000 visitors amid the coronavirus pandemic – compared to about 500,000 in an average year. Still, it’s expected to become one of the largest public gatherings since the outbreak began. Local officials scaled back the event, canceling city-hosted aspects and cutting spending on advertisements due to the COVID-19 crisis. They also plan to conduct mass testing on visitors to get an idea of the virus’ impact on the rally.
Check out an awesome video of Sgt. 1st class Bowman making a jump:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHzqsNy72Tc&feature=emb_title
Kota TV also covered Bowman’s jump and had this to say:
Bikers rolled into Indian Motorcycle in Sturgis as part of the Veterans ride to help kick off the 80th Sturgis Rally. While Another veteran — who has spent a lot of time in the air — dropped in to share his story. Sergeant First Class Dana Bowman has done over 4,000 parachute jumps from an airplane, and today he parachuted in with the American Flag at the Veterans Ride. “Without what our warriors, veterans, or soldiers have done for us we wouldn’t have our freedom. And that’s why we’re here in Sturgis today,” Bowman said. Despite having so many jumps under his belt, Bowman still finds jumps like these during the rally to be especially moving. ” You know it is so exhilarating to be an inspiration to a lot of them,” Bowman said. “Some are looking for hope. Hope for despondent, courage to the timid, and strength to the weak.” ***Support We Love Trump and Mike Lindell plus get up to 66% off -- use promo code WLT at MyPillow.com*** Bowman himself isn’t only a vet but suffered a horrific injury while serving his country. “Way back in 1994, I was in a mid-air collision on the Army Parachute Team, The Golden Knights,” Bowman said. “A mid-air collision that took the life of my teammate and both of my legs,” Bowman said. With his fellow veterans there to catch the American Flag he parachuted in with before it touched the ground, Bowman is standing proud in the city of riders. “And to be able to bring in the American Flag, you think about what our veterans have down for us, sacrificing and supporting and defending the Constitution of the United States of America it means an awful lot,” Bowman said.
Sgt. Bowman is truly an American hero, who continually show’s his support to a country he gave so much to. Veterans around the States have been inspired by his testimony.
It’s truly refreshing to see someone fly the red, white, and blue instead of burning it.


welovetrump--2020-08-13--Rioters Could Face Life in Prison for Mischief Charges

“ If you play with fire you get burnt ” this is the case with rioters in Utah who were charged with possible life sentences in Utah .
BLM rioters stormed the District Attorney ’ s office and vandalized it with paint and broke several windows .
A life sentence could be the wake-up call to these entitled rioters who think they can do whatever they want without receiving a consequence .
Fox News had this to say about the rioters possibly receiving life sentences : Some Black Lives Matter protesters in Salt Lake City could face up to life @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of splashing red paint and smashing windows during a protest , a potential punishment that stands out among demonstrators arrested around the country and one that critics say doesn ’ t fit the alleged crime .
The felony criminal mischief charges are more serious because they carry a gang enhancement .
Prosecutors said Wednesday that ’ s justified because the protesters worked together to cause thousands of dollars in damage , but watchdogs called the use of the 1990s-era law troubling , especially in the context of criminal justice reform and minority communities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just the enforcement of the law , it feels retaliatory , ” said Madalena McNeil , who is facing a potential life sentence over felony criminal mischief and riot charges .
Charging documents say she bought red paint at a Home Depot before the July 9 demonstration sparked by a fatal police shooting ruling .
She later yelled at and shifted her weight as if to slam into police during the demonstration , charges state .
“ It ’ s really frustrating and scary … I just feel so much concern for what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in general.
” The charges have Democratic leaders at odds in Salt Lake City , the liberal-leaning capital of conservative Utah , with the top county prosecutor arguing vandalism crossed a line and the mayor calling the charges too extreme .
The potential life sentence stands out as harsh punishment even among other people facing felony charges stemming from protests around the country .
In Portland , Oregon , for instance , a 32-year-old man is facing up to 20 years on an arson charge alleging he broke into a building that houses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on fire .
The Utah demonstrators are unlikely to serve prison time , said Salt Lake County District Attorney Sim Gill .
Though they ’ d get at least five years if convicted as charged , criminal cases often end with a plea to lesser counts .
CBS News had this to say about the BLM rioters charges : Black Lives Matter protesters in Salt Lake City have been accused of splashing paint on a road and smashing the windows of the district attorney ’ s building at a July protest — and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a maximum sentence of life in prison .
Prosecutors charged multiple protesters with the crimes on Wednesday , The Associated Press reported .
The charges have more severe consequences because Salt Lake City District Attorney Sim Gill upgraded them with a “ gang enhancement , ” which increases the penalties for “ offenses committed in concert with two or more person or in relation to a criminal street gang , ” according to state code .
With the enhancement , second-degree felony charges , which usually have a sentence of 1 to 15 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in prison .
Prosecutors said that these charges are justified because protesters worked together to cause thousands of dollars in damage , the AP said .
What do you think ?
Do you think they ’ re throwing the book at these BLM rioters or are they giving the community justice by charging them with a tough sentence ?

We may receive compensation from affiliate partners for some links on this site. Read our full Disclosure here
870 views
“If you play with fire you get burnt” this is the case with rioters in Utah who were charged with possible life sentences in Utah.
BLM rioters stormed the District Attorney’s office and vandalized it with paint and broke several windows.
A life sentence could be the wake-up call to these entitled rioters who think they can do whatever they want without receiving a consequence.
HARD TIME: BLM Protesters Could Face ‘LIFE IN PRISON’ for Attacking DA’s Office in Utah https://t.co/Zfgfhh067m — Sean Hannity (@seanhannity) August 7, 2020
Some Black Lives Matter demonstrators could face up to life in prison if they’re convicted of splashing red paint and smashing windows during a protest https://t.co/MPY1YbRgSZ — KTLA (@KTLA) August 7, 2020
https://twitter.com/AdamMilstein/status/1292121640776728581
Fox News had this to say about the rioters possibly receiving life sentences:
Some Black Lives Matter protesters in Salt Lake City could face up to life in prison if they’re convicted of splashing red paint and smashing windows during a protest, a potential punishment that stands out among demonstrators arrested around the country and one that critics say doesn’t fit the alleged crime. The felony criminal mischief charges are more serious because they carry a gang enhancement. Prosecutors said Wednesday that’s justified because the protesters worked together to cause thousands of dollars in damage, but watchdogs called the use of the 1990s-era law troubling, especially in the context of criminal justice reform and minority communities. “This is so far beyond just the enforcement of the law, it feels retaliatory,” said Madalena McNeil, who is facing a potential life sentence over felony criminal mischief and riot charges. Charging documents say she bought red paint at a Home Depot before the July 9 demonstration sparked by a fatal police shooting ruling. She later yelled at and shifted her weight as if to slam into police during the demonstration, charges state. “It’s really frustrating and scary … I just feel so much concern for what this means for the right to protest in general.” The charges have Democratic leaders at odds in Salt Lake City, the liberal-leaning capital of conservative Utah, with the top county prosecutor arguing vandalism crossed a line and the mayor calling the charges too extreme. The potential life sentence stands out as harsh punishment even among other people facing felony charges stemming from protests around the country. In Portland, Oregon, for instance, a 32-year-old man is facing up to 20 years on an arson charge alleging he broke into a building that houses the police headquarters and set an office on fire. The Utah demonstrators are unlikely to serve prison time, said Salt Lake County District Attorney Sim Gill. Though they’d get at least five years if convicted as charged, criminal cases often end with a plea to lesser counts.
Black Lives Matters protesters could face life sentence for mischief charges in Utah https://t.co/E0fdKUF83P pic.twitter.com/ava4kT5llb — The Hill (@thehill) August 7, 2020
CBS News had this to say about the BLM rioters charges:
Black Lives Matter protesters in Salt Lake City have been accused of splashing paint on a road and smashing the windows of the district attorney’s building at a July protest — and now, the charges they face carry a maximum sentence of life in prison. Prosecutors charged multiple protesters with the crimes on Wednesday, The Associated Press reported. The charges have more severe consequences because Salt Lake City District Attorney Sim Gill upgraded them with a “gang enhancement,” which increases the penalties for “offenses committed in concert with two or more person or in relation to a criminal street gang,” according to state code. NATIONAL POLL: Will You Vote For Trump A THIRD Time? With the enhancement, second-degree felony charges, which usually have a sentence of 1 to 15 years, can be upgraded to life in prison. Prosecutors said that these charges are justified because protesters worked together to cause thousands of dollars in damage, the AP said.
What do you think? Do you think they’re throwing the book at these BLM rioters or are they giving the community justice by charging them with a tough sentence?


welovetrump--2020-08-14--Rioting and Looting Makes Chicago Look Like a Third-World Country

I never thought I 'd see this in America .
Certainly not in a once-great City like Chicago .
Chicago @ @ @ @ @ a break these days , but I guess that 's what happens when your city @ @ @ @ @ for decades .
Looters in the name of `` social justice '' rained down destruction @ @ @ @ @ claiming the destruciton was `` reparations '' .
Nearly endless vandalism on luxury establishments leaves @ @ @ @

I never thought I'd see this in America.
Iraq?
Maybe.
But not America.
Certainly not in a once-great City like Chicago.
Chicago can't seem to get a break these days, but I guess that's what happens when your city has been ran by Democrats for decades.
Eventualyl it cracks.
Looters in the name of "social justice" rained down destruction on Chicago recently, some claiming the destruciton was "reparations".
HUH?
Nearly endless vandalism on luxury establishments leaves Chicago almost unrecognizable.


welovetrump--2020-08-14--CNN is Already Reporting That Biden Could “Step Aside” for Kamala Harris

Joe Biden picked his running mate Kamala Harris and hours after doing so CNN published an article stating that Harris would be ready to step in when Biden decides to step aside .
They are not even hiding the strings to their puppet Joe Biden anymore !
Look below CNN flat out said Kamala Harris is ready to take over .
CNN blatantly stated Harris is ready to step in when Joe Biden is ready to step aside : What Biden did is make the pick that maximized his chances of continuing to make the race a straight referendum on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Harris , whose resume suggests will be ready to step in if and when Biden decides to step aside .
This is the VP choice of a confident candidate , and campaign , who believe they are winning .
And who believe that , as long they execute the basics of the campaign between now and November 3 , Biden will be sworn in as the 46th president on January 20 , 2021 .
The Western Journal had this to say about Biden stepping aside : Joe Biden wasn ’ t just picking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shined their favor upon him — would be taking over for him in four or possibly eight years .
Instead , Biden was picking someone who might be taking over for him much sooner than that .
In fact , one of CNN ’ s top political analysts believes the choice was made because Biden might want to “ step aside ” in order to let Harris take over .
This isn ’ t one of CNN ’ s token Republicans , either .
( Try even finding one of those . )
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Washington insider — in fact , his analysis is often chided for its boneheaded simplicity — but he known to tilt toward the left .
His take on the pick was pretty much everyone ’ s take : It was Biden ’ s safest harbor under the circumstances .
The truth is out and nobody seems to even want to hide it anymore .
We have all known since the beginning if Biden becomes President the left will pull all the strings while Biden is just left to be the puppet .
That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be calling the shots in America .

We may receive compensation from affiliate partners for some links on this site. Read our full Disclosure here
5,343 views
Joe Biden picked his running mate Kamala Harris and hours after doing so CNN published an article stating that Harris would be ready to step in when Biden decides to step aside.
They are not even hiding the strings to their puppet Joe Biden anymore!
Look below CNN flat out said Kamala Harris is ready to take over.
Joe Biden made the pick that maximized his chances of continuing to make the race a straight referendum on Trump while also selecting someone whose resume suggests being ready to step in, if and when Biden decides to step aside. | Analysis by @CillizzaCNN https://t.co/Ek4d6sfGfT — CNN (@CNN) August 11, 2020
Within hours of the announcement that Kamala Harris would be Joe Biden’s running mate, CNN published an article asserting that Harris would be able to take on the presidency if and when Biden decides to “step aside.”https://t.co/KAUctvrxqX — Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) August 12, 2020
CURL: CNN Editor Suggests Joe Biden Could ‘Step Aside’ for Kamala Harris https://t.co/sNX9t9X1Zm pic.twitter.com/kX5H9pTaIc — The Daily Wire (@realDailyWire) August 12, 2020
CNN blatantly stated Harris is ready to step in when Joe Biden is ready to step aside:
What Biden did is make the pick that maximized his chances of continuing to make the race a straight referendum on Trump while also selecting someone, in Harris, whose resume suggests will be ready to step in if and when Biden decides to step aside. This is the VP choice of a confident candidate, and campaign, who believe they are winning. And who believe that, as long they execute the basics of the campaign between now and November 3, Biden will be sworn in as the 46th president on January 20, 2021.
Who does Kamala plan to pick as her VP? — Chad Prather (@WatchChad) August 12, 2020
The Western Journal had this to say about Biden stepping aside:
PRAYER CHAIN FOR TRUMP: Please add your name and a prayer to support our President! Joe Biden wasn’t just picking someone he hoped– if the political deities shined their favor upon him — would be taking over for him in four or possibly eight years. Instead, Biden was picking someone who might be taking over for him much sooner than that. In fact, one of CNN’s top political analysts believes the choice was made because Biden might want to “step aside” in order to let Harris take over. This isn’t one of CNN’s token Republicans, either. (Try even finding one of those.) Chris Cillizza isn’t quite the Washington insider — in fact, his analysis is often chided for its boneheaded simplicity — but he known to tilt toward the left. His take on the pick was pretty much everyone’s take: It was Biden’s safest harbor under the circumstances.


welovetrump--2020-08-14--DOJ Finds Yale ILLEGALLY Discriminates Against Whites and Asians

Federal taxpayer dollars should not be going to a university that implements such racist policies .
And hopefully the DOJ will expand its investigation into other universities , which are probably using the same dirty practices that Yale is .
The Hill published a great op-ed last month detailing the discriminatory tactics colleges use in the admissions process : In 1976 , Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall lambasted the “ illogic ” of civil rights advocates insisting that laws against discrimination should protect only minorities from discrimination .
The first African American justice and civil rights litigator declared that whites @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as bizarre as it may seem , he could be denounced as enabling claims of “ reverse discrimination.
” Yet this debate could find its way back to the Supreme Court , given the array of controversies over the use of race as a threshold criteria for benefits or penalties .
The Black Lives Matter movement was premised on the need to recognize the inequities and abuse of African Americans exclusively , rather than a broader position that “ all lives matter.
” The protests have convinced many of us about the importance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ states are turning to reforms where that racial exclusivity presents a potentially insurmountable barrier .
Relying on threshold exclusions of all but one or two races could rekindle the debate over “ reverse discrimination ” and what constitutes discrimination versus affirmative action .
Marshall is an interesting figure at the crossroads of that debate .
While ruling that whites are protected from racial discrimination under laws like Title VII , he supported affirmative action and dissented from the 1978 decision in the Allan Bakke case to reject reverse discrimination claims .
He maintained @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to correct the continuing depravations of racism since the Supreme Court “ did not prohibit the most ingenious and pervasive forms of discrimination ” against blacks .
He stated , “ I can not believe that this same Constitution stands as a barrier.
” The question is where to draw that line and if “ reverse discrimination ” is real .
That issue came up when Gary Garrels , a senior curator at the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art , resigned after he was denounced as a racist .
The reason ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the famed collection , Garrels said , “ We will definitely still continue to collect white artists.
” He reportedly also said a ban on acquiring art from white artists would be “ reverse discrimination.
” A petition calling for his firing said the terms “ reverse discrimination ” and “ reverse racism ” are offensive forms of “ white supremacist and racist language.
” This instance highlights the limitations and the lingering debate over such distinctions .
His colleagues had every right to express their views of his comments , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decision .
However , his objection to the use of race as an exclusive criteria to be in the collection captured the uncertainty between discrimination and diversification , a line that has occupied the Supreme Court for decades without a clear resolution in college admissions and other areas .
One possible case may arise in Seattle , where city council members have called to cut the police budget by 50 percent .
Doing so would require firing a significant number of police officers , which is also popular .
But that puts the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ firing half of the department would start with the most junior officers , many of whom are minorities .
Thus , defunding the police in the name of racial justice would lead to firing minority officers .
One simple solution , according to city council member Lisa Herbold , is to fire the white officers .
Her proposal is striking in both its illegality and its popularity .
In his 1976 opinion in the Santa Fe Trail Transportation Company case , Marshall ruled for two white employees fired after a theft .
While @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , only the two white employees were fired .
Marshall said that discriminating against them made a mockery of laws against discrimination .
In 2009 , the Supreme Court ruled against New Haven after white firefighters and a Hispanic firefighter challenged the city when it refused to certify results of promotion exams in order to promote black firefighters who did not perform as well .
The Supreme Court held that the refusal to certify was unlawful discrimination .
While the Supreme Court has allowed race to be considered as a factor in some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ down certain programs that crossed the line into discrimination .
The position of many of the justices on this is summed up by Chief Justice John Roberts in a landmark 2007 decision in which he wrote , “ The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminaton on the basis of race .
”

Federal taxpayer dollars should not be going to a university that implements such racist policies.
And hopefully the DOJ will expand its investigation into other universities, which are probably using the same dirty practices that Yale is.
The Hill published a great op-ed last month detailing the discriminatory tactics colleges use in the admissions process:
In 1976, Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall lambasted the “illogic” of civil rights advocates insisting that laws against discrimination should protect only minorities from discrimination. The first African American justice and civil rights litigator declared that whites also deserved such protections. Today, as bizarre as it may seem, he could be denounced as enabling claims of “reverse discrimination.” Yet this debate could find its way back to the Supreme Court, given the array of controversies over the use of race as a threshold criteria for benefits or penalties.
The Black Lives Matter movement was premised on the need to recognize the inequities and abuse of African Americans exclusively, rather than a broader position that “all lives matter.” The protests have convinced many of us about the importance of that recognition. But cities and states are turning to reforms where that racial exclusivity presents a potentially insurmountable barrier. Relying on threshold exclusions of all but one or two races could rekindle the debate over “reverse discrimination” and what constitutes discrimination versus affirmative action.
Marshall is an interesting figure at the crossroads of that debate. While ruling that whites are protected from racial discrimination under laws like Title VII, he supported affirmative action and dissented from the 1978 decision in the Allan Bakke case to reject reverse discrimination claims. He maintained that there was much to be done to correct the continuing depravations of racism since the Supreme Court “did not prohibit the most ingenious and pervasive forms of discrimination” against blacks. He stated, “I cannot believe that this same Constitution stands as a barrier.”
The question is where to draw that line and if “reverse discrimination” is real. That issue came up when Gary Garrels, a senior curator at the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, resigned after he was denounced as a racist. The reason? While supporting diversity of the artists exhibited in the famed collection, Garrels said, “We will definitely still continue to collect white artists.” He reportedly also said a ban on acquiring art from white artists would be “reverse discrimination.” A petition calling for his firing said the terms “reverse discrimination” and “reverse racism” are offensive forms of “white supremacist and racist language.”
This instance highlights the limitations and the lingering debate over such distinctions. His colleagues had every right to express their views of his comments, and his decision to resign was a private decision. However, his objection to the use of race as an exclusive criteria to be in the collection captured the uncertainty between discrimination and diversification, a line that has occupied the Supreme Court for decades without a clear resolution in college admissions and other areas.
One possible case may arise in Seattle, where city council members have called to cut the police budget by 50 percent. Doing so would require firing a significant number of police officers, which is also popular. But that puts the city council in a quandary, as firing half of the department would start with the most junior officers, many of whom are minorities. Thus, defunding the police in the name of racial justice would lead to firing minority officers. One simple solution, according to city council member Lisa Herbold, is to fire the white officers.
Her proposal is striking in both its illegality and its popularity. In his 1976 opinion in the Santa Fe Trail Transportation Company case, Marshall ruled for two white employees fired after a theft. While a black employee also was held responsible, only the two white employees were fired. Marshall said that discriminating against them made a mockery of laws against discrimination. In 2009, the Supreme Court ruled against New Haven after white firefighters and a Hispanic firefighter challenged the city when it refused to certify results of promotion exams in order to promote black firefighters who did not perform as well. The Supreme Court held that the refusal to certify was unlawful discrimination.
While the Supreme Court has allowed race to be considered as a factor in some college admissions cases, it has struck down certain programs that crossed the line into discrimination. The position of many of the justices on this is summed up by Chief Justice John Roberts in a landmark 2007 decision in which he wrote, “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminaton on the basis of race.”


welovetrump--2020-08-14--Famous Legal Expert, John Eastman, Questions Kamala Harris’s Eligibility to Be Vice President

There ’ s been an interesting question circulating lately as to whether or not Kamala Harris can legally run for Vice President .
Democrats cry that it ’ s racist to even give the matter a thought .
But famed legal scholar John Eastman isn ’ t afraid to look into the matter !
According to the information gathered by Eastman , Harris is potentially ineligible to run for VP due to her parents immigration status when she was born .
Take a look at Eastman ’ s op-ed published in Newsweek : The fact that Senator Kamala Harris has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mate for presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden has some questioning her eligibility for the position .
The 12th Amendment provides that “ no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.
” And Article II of the Constitution specifies that “ [ n ] o person except a natural born citizen…shall be eligible to the office of President.
” Her father was ( and is ) a Jamaican national , her mother was from India , and neither was a naturalized @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ birth in 1964 .
That , according to these commentators , makes her not a “ natural born citizen ” —and therefore ineligible for the office of the president and , hence , ineligible for the office of the vice president .
“ Nonsense , ” runs the counter-commentary .
Indeed , PolitiFact rated the claim of ineligibility as “ Pants on Fire ” false , Snopes rated it simply “ False , ” and from the other side of the political spectrum , Conservative Daily News likewise rated it “ False.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) simply assert that Harris is eligible because she was born in Oakland—and is therefore a natural-born citizen from location of birth .
The 14th Amendment says so , they all claim , and the Supreme Court so held in the 1898 case of U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark .
But those claims are erroneous , at least as the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment was originally understood—an error to which even my good friend , renowned UCLA School of Law professor Eugene Volokh , has fallen prey .
The language of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a natural-born citizen .
The original Constitution did not define citizenship , but the 14th Amendment does—and it provides that “ all persons born…in the United States , and subject to the jurisdiction thereof , are citizens.
” Those who claim that birth alone is sufficient overlook the second phrase .
The person must also be “ subject to the jurisdiction ” of the United States , and that meant subject to the complete jurisdiction , not merely a partial jurisdiction such as that which applies to anyone temporarily sojourning in the United @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Such was the view of those who authored the 14th Amendment ’ s Citizenship Clause ; of the Supreme Court of the United States in the 1872 Slaughter-House Cases and the 1884 case of Elk v. Wilkins ; of Thomas Cooley , the leading constitutional treatise writer of the day ; and of the State Department , which , in the 1880s , issued directives to U.S. embassies to that effect .
The Supreme Court ’ s subsequent decision in Wong Kim Ark is not to the contrary .
At issue there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who had become lawful , permanent residents in the United States— ” domiciled ” was the legally significant word used by the Court .
But that was the extent of the Court ’ s holding ( as opposed to broader language that was dicta , and therefore not binding ) .
Indeed , the Supreme Court has never held that anyone born on U.S. soil , no matter the circumstances of the parents , is automatically a U.S. citizen .
Granted , our government ’ s view of the Constitution ’ s citizenship @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what is now an absolute “ birth on the soil no matter the circumstances ” view—but that morphing does not appear to have begun until the late 1960s , after Kamala Harris ’ birth in 1964 .
The children born on U.S. soil to guest workers from Mexico during the Roaring 1920s were not viewed as citizens , for example , when , in the wake of the Great Depression , their families were repatriated to Mexico .
Nor were the children born on U.S. soil to guest workers in the bracero program @ @ @ @ @ @ @ citizens when that program ended , and their families emigrated back to their home countries .
So before we so cavalierly accept Senator Harris ’ eligibility for the office of vice president , we should ask her a few questions about the status of her parents at the time of her birth .

There’s been an interesting question circulating lately as to whether or not Kamala Harris can legally run for Vice President.
Democrats cry that it’s racist to even give the matter a thought.
But famed legal scholar John Eastman isn’t afraid to look into the matter!
According to the information gathered by Eastman, Harris is potentially ineligible to run for VP due to her parents immigration status when she was born.
Take a look at Eastman’s op-ed published in Newsweek:
The fact that Senator Kamala Harris has just been named the vice presidential running mate for presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden has some questioning her eligibility for the position. The 12th Amendment provides that “no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.” And Article II of the Constitution specifies that “[n]o person except a natural born citizen…shall be eligible to the office of President.” Her father was (and is) a Jamaican national, her mother was from India, and neither was a naturalized U.S. citizen at the time of Harris’ birth in 1964. That, according to these commentators, makes her not a “natural born citizen”—and therefore ineligible for the office of the president and, hence, ineligible for the office of the vice president.
“Nonsense,” runs the counter-commentary. Indeed, PolitiFact rated the claim of ineligibility as “Pants on Fire” false, Snopes rated it simply “False,” and from the other side of the political spectrum, Conservative Daily News likewise rated it “False.” All three (and numerous others) simply assert that Harris is eligible because she was born in Oakland—and is therefore a natural-born citizen from location of birth. The 14th Amendment says so, they all claim, and the Supreme Court so held in the 1898 case of U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark.
But those claims are erroneous, at least as the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment was originally understood—an error to which even my good friend, renowned UCLA School of Law professor Eugene Volokh, has fallen prey.
The language of Article II is that one must be a natural-born citizen. The original Constitution did not define citizenship, but the 14th Amendment does—and it provides that “all persons born…in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.” Those who claim that birth alone is sufficient overlook the second phrase. The person must also be “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States, and that meant subject to the complete jurisdiction, not merely a partial jurisdiction such as that which applies to anyone temporarily sojourning in the United States (whether lawfully or unlawfully). Such was the view of those who authored the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause; of the Supreme Court of the United States in the 1872 Slaughter-House Cases and the 1884 case of Elk v. Wilkins; of Thomas Cooley, the leading constitutional treatise writer of the day; and of the State Department, which, in the 1880s, issued directives to U.S. embassies to that effect.
The Supreme Court’s subsequent decision in Wong Kim Ark is not to the contrary. At issue there was a child born to Chinese immigrants who had become lawful, permanent residents in the United States—”domiciled” was the legally significant word used by the Court. But that was the extent of the Court’s holding (as opposed to broader language that was dicta, and therefore not binding). Indeed, the Supreme Court has never held that anyone born on U.S. soil, no matter the circumstances of the parents, is automatically a U.S. citizen.
Granted, our government’s view of the Constitution’s citizenship mandate has morphed over the decades to what is now an absolute “birth on the soil no matter the circumstances” view—but that morphing does not appear to have begun until the late 1960s, after Kamala Harris’ birth in 1964. The children born on U.S. soil to guest workers from Mexico during the Roaring 1920s were not viewed as citizens, for example, when, in the wake of the Great Depression, their families were repatriated to Mexico. Nor were the children born on U.S. soil to guest workers in the bracero program of the 1950s and early 1960s deemed citizens when that program ended, and their families emigrated back to their home countries.
So before we so cavalierly accept Senator Harris’ eligibility for the office of vice president, we should ask her a few questions about the status of her parents at the time of her birth.


welovetrump--2020-08-14--Police Save The Day As Migrant Takes Man Hostage At Knifepoint!

A truly disturbing video has surfaced the internet of a man holding a neck to an officer ’ s throat .
The truly disgusting act of violence happened at Milan ’ s catherdral in Italy .
Take a look at the video below for yourself be careful it ’ s pretty graphic : In case that gets taken down : National File had this to say about the migrant attacking the police officer : A dramatic video from Italy is circulating social media , showing a police officer held hostage by a knife-wielding “ migrant ” at Milan ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , police swoop in to disarm the knifeman to make the arrest .
Footage has surfaced from nail-biting scenes within Il Duomo di Milano as a man , reported as a “ North African Migrant , ” holds a knife to a police officer ’ s throat .
Fellow officers surround the cornered migrant with the hostage attempting to negotiate with the suspect , until one cavalier officer leaped in to remove the weapon from the suspect ’ s grasp to defuse the potentially incandescent situation .
The tweet containing the video reads @ @ @ @ @ @ @ North African wanted to slaughter Agent in front of the altar .
The beast made the Agent kneel under threat of a knife aimed at the throat .
Saved by # PoliziaDiStato .
Unworthy government : enough illegal immigrants !
” According to local media , the man , believed to be of Maghrebi descent , was acting suspiciously on the church steps when he was approached by security guards .
The suspect then ran into the cathedral and overpowered one officer before holding a knife to his throat and demanding him to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ military personnel arrived at the scene to cordon off the area in an effort to resolve the dramatic situation .
After the suspect was encircled by half a dozen agents , an arrest was made within a few minutes .
The hostage reportedly suffered minor injuries as a result of the ordeal .
Il Giornale continued to report that there are an estimated 50,000 illegal immigrants roaming the streets of Milan .
Identifying the suspect may prove to be a difficult endeavor given a lack of documentation .
Populist politician Paolo Grimoldi had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state of the Northern Italian city .
“ I agree with the choice of Milan , ” he said .
“ A city symbol of decay , a city in disarray from the point of view of public order , with stabbings and rapes every day ( even today a guard kidnapped with a knife in the Duomo … ) , with an open-air shop practically in every car park and with about 50 thousand illegal immigrants who roam without any control in the city ” In recent years , Italy has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its Mediterranean route as hundreds of thousands of migrants vie to reach European countries with generous welfare states and high quality of life .
NDTV had this to say about the migrant taking the police officer as a hostage : Rome : A man armed with a knife momentarily took a guard hostage inside Milan ’ s cathedral on Wednesday but was quickly arrested , police said .
He entered the famous Gothic Duomo shortly after 1pm local time ( 1100 GMT ) and “ advanced towards the private security guard , took @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” police spokesman Marco Turchetto told AFP .
After the arrival of nearby officers on patrol and a brief mediation , the man dropped the knife and was arrested , he said .
Milan ’ s Deputy Mayor Anna Scavuzzo said in a statement the man had entered the cathedral in order to evade a police check .
Milan has an estimated 50,000 illegal immigrants , and most residents think it ’ s 50,000 too many .
Milan has been very lenient on migrants who have entered the city and the result is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should just ban knives that will solve the problem ( if you ’ re a liberal thinker ) .

We may receive compensation from affiliate partners for some links on this site. Read our full Disclosure here
248 views
A truly disturbing video has surfaced the internet of a man holding a neck to an officer’s throat.
The truly disgusting act of violence happened at Milan’s catherdral in Italy.
Take a look at the video below for yourself be careful it’s pretty graphic:
A man armed with a knife momentarily took a guard hostage inside Milan's cathedral on Wednesday but was quickly arrested, police saidhttps://t.co/pBmcSX0pZv — AFP News Agency (@AFP) August 12, 2020
https://twitter.com/TheMikePatrick/status/1293886929541439490
In case that gets taken down:
Duomo di Milano, #risorsaINPS nordafricano voleva sgozzare Agente davanti all'altare. La bestia ha fatto inginocchiare l'Agente sotto la minaccia di un coltello puntato alla gola. Salvato dalla #PoliziaDiStato. Governo indegno: basta clandestini! @BasedPoland #RadioSavana pic.twitter.com/2XvDpmaY5L — RadioSavana (@RadioSavana) August 12, 2020
National File had this to say about the migrant attacking the police officer:
A dramatic video from Italy is circulating social media, showing a police officer held hostage by a knife-wielding “migrant” at Milan’s Cathedral. After bargaining with the kidnapper, police swoop in to disarm the knifeman to make the arrest. Footage has surfaced from nail-biting scenes within Il Duomo di Milano as a man, reported as a “North African Migrant,” holds a knife to a police officer’s throat. Fellow officers surround the cornered migrant with the hostage attempting to negotiate with the suspect, until one cavalier officer leaped in to remove the weapon from the suspect’s grasp to defuse the potentially incandescent situation. The tweet containing the video reads: “Milan Cathedral, #risorsaINPS North African wanted to slaughter Agent in front of the altar. The beast made the Agent kneel under threat of a knife aimed at the throat. Saved by #PoliziaDiStato. Unworthy government: enough illegal immigrants!” According to local media, the man, believed to be of Maghrebi descent, was acting suspiciously on the church steps when he was approached by security guards. The suspect then ran into the cathedral and overpowered one officer before holding a knife to his throat and demanding him to kneel. Within moments, police and military personnel arrived at the scene to cordon off the area in an effort to resolve the dramatic situation. After the suspect was encircled by half a dozen agents, an arrest was made within a few minutes. The hostage reportedly suffered minor injuries as a result of the ordeal. Il Giornale continued to report that there are an estimated 50,000 illegal immigrants roaming the streets of Milan. Identifying the suspect may prove to be a difficult endeavor given a lack of documentation. Populist politician Paolo Grimoldi had some very choice words about the current state of the Northern Italian city. “I agree with the choice of Milan,” he said. “A city symbol of decay, a city in disarray from the point of view of public order, with stabbings and rapes every day (even today a guard kidnapped with a knife in the Duomo …), with an open-air shop practically in every car park and with about 50 thousand illegal immigrants who roam without any control in the city ” In recent years, Italy has been hit with waves of illegal immigration through its Mediterranean route as hundreds of thousands of migrants vie to reach European countries with generous welfare states and high quality of life.
Knife Man Holds Guard Hostage At Milan Cathedral, Arrested https://t.co/wjeDQ4LUlm pic.twitter.com/XPg4Y5CJZC — NDTV (@ndtv) August 12, 2020
NDTV had this to say about the migrant taking the police officer as a hostage:
Rome: A man armed with a knife momentarily took a guard hostage inside Milan’s cathedral on Wednesday but was quickly arrested, police said. He entered the famous Gothic Duomo shortly after 1pm local time (1100 GMT) and “advanced towards the private security guard, took out a knife and threatened him,” police spokesman Marco Turchetto told AFP. After the arrival of nearby officers on patrol and a brief mediation, the man dropped the knife and was arrested, he said. Milan’s Deputy Mayor Anna Scavuzzo said in a statement the man had entered the cathedral in order to evade a police check.
Milan has an estimated 50,000 illegal immigrants, and most residents think it’s 50,000 too many.
Milan has been very lenient on migrants who have entered the city and the result is a higher crime rate. Maybe they should just ban knives that will solve the problem(if you’re a liberal thinker).


welovetrump--2020-08-14--Representative Devin Nunes: Biden Knew “Damn Well” About Spying on the Trump Campaign

Democrats would like to see all of this brushed under the rug .
With any sign of evidence that the Obama Administration spied on the Trump campaign they begin to scream that it 's all a conspiracy theory !
But as another op-ed in the Detroit News points out , Obamagate is not a conspiracy theory : Those sharing # Obamagate on Twitter would do best to avoid the hysterics we saw from Russian-collusion believers , but they have no reason to ignore the mounting evidence that suggests the Obama administration engaged in serious corruption .
Democrats and their allies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Barack Obama 's only scandalous act was wearing a tan suit , are going spend the next few months gaslighting the public by focusing on the most feverish accusations against Obama .
But the fact is that we already have more compelling evidence that the Obama administration engaged in misconduct than we ever did for opening the Russian-collusion investigation .
It is not conspiracy-mongering to note that the investigation into Donald Trump was predicated on an opposition-research document filled with fabulism and , most likely , Russian disinformation .
We know the DOJ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on those in Trump 's orbit .
We have proof that many of the relevant FISA-warrant applications — almost every one of them , actually — were based on `` fabricated '' evidence or riddled with errors .
We know that members of the Obama administration , who had no genuine role in counterintelligence operations , repeatedly unmasked Trump 's allies .
And we now know that , despite a dearth of evidence , the FBI railroaded Michael Flynn into a guilty plea so it could keep the investigation going .
What 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these facts more damning .
By 2016 , the Obama administration 's intelligence community had normalized domestic spying .
Obama 's director of national intelligence , James Clapper , famously lied about snooping on American citizens to Congress .
His CIA director , John Brennan , oversaw an agency that felt comfortable spying on the Senate , with at least five of his underlings breaking into congressional computer files .
His attorney general , Eric Holder , invoked the Espionage Act to spy on a Fox News journalist , shopping his case to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ let him name the reporter as a co-conspirator .
The Obama administration also spied on Associated Press reporters , which the news organization called a `` massive and unprecedented intrusion . ''
And though it 's been long forgotten , Obama officials were caught monitoring the conversations of members of Congress who opposed the Iran nuclear deal .

Democrats would like to see all of this brushed under the rug.
With any sign of evidence that the Obama Administration spied on the Trump campaign they begin to scream that it's all a conspiracy theory!
But as another op-ed in the Detroit News points out, Obamagate is not a conspiracy theory:
Those sharing #Obamagate on Twitter would do best to avoid the hysterics we saw from Russian-collusion believers, but they have no reason to ignore the mounting evidence that suggests the Obama administration engaged in serious corruption.
Democrats and their allies, who like to pretend that President Barack Obama's only scandalous act was wearing a tan suit, are going spend the next few months gaslighting the public by focusing on the most feverish accusations against Obama. But the fact is that we already have more compelling evidence that the Obama administration engaged in misconduct than we ever did for opening the Russian-collusion investigation.
It is not conspiracy-mongering to note that the investigation into Donald Trump was predicated on an opposition-research document filled with fabulism and, most likely, Russian disinformation. We know the DOJ withheld contradictory evidence when it began spying on those in Trump's orbit. We have proof that many of the relevant FISA-warrant applications — almost every one of them, actually — were based on "fabricated" evidence or riddled with errors. We know that members of the Obama administration, who had no genuine role in counterintelligence operations, repeatedly unmasked Trump's allies. And we now know that, despite a dearth of evidence, the FBI railroaded Michael Flynn into a guilty plea so it could keep the investigation going.
What's more, the larger context only makes these facts more damning. By 2016, the Obama administration's intelligence community had normalized domestic spying. Obama's director of national intelligence, James Clapper, famously lied about snooping on American citizens to Congress. His CIA director, John Brennan, oversaw an agency that felt comfortable spying on the Senate, with at least five of his underlings breaking into congressional computer files. His attorney general, Eric Holder, invoked the Espionage Act to spy on a Fox News journalist, shopping his case to three judges until he found one who let him name the reporter as a co-conspirator. The Obama administration also spied on Associated Press reporters, which the news organization called a "massive and unprecedented intrusion." And though it's been long forgotten, Obama officials were caught monitoring the conversations of members of Congress who opposed the Iran nuclear deal.


welovetrump--2020-08-15--California County Declares Itself “Sanctuary County” for Christian Worship Services!

It ’ s always important to remember that we live in a federal republic .
This means that we elect officials at local , county , state , and national levels to represent us and do our will .
Each of these elected officials is beholden to us , the voters , and to the Constitution that places the supreme power of our state in our hands .
Federal and state officials do not have the authority to supersede your rights , and every single elected official below any tyrant is morally bound to you , not to the tyrant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ principle behind the function of our system is well exemplified in San Luis Obispo District Attorney Dan Dow , who has said he will not be prosecuting anyone for attending church services which , as The Christian Post notes , have been considered unlawful in most counties in California under Governor Gavin Newsom ’ s coronavirus orders .
“ I declare San Luis Obispo County a sanctuary county for singing and praising in our houses of worship , ” Dow said in a video he posted to Twitter .
“ Inherent with my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ discretion I have … to pursue only those charges that are warranted and are in the interest of justice.
” CP explains : More than 30 counties in California are not allowed to gather for church services , according to Newsom ’ s order that places even greater restrictions on counties included in the state ’ s COVID-19 watch list .
Gatherings of 10 people or more in households in those counties are also banned , essentially prohibiting some in-home Bible study gatherings .
Whether a church can legally gather or not , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s order .
Churches in other counties not on the watch list are permitted to gather in limited capacities as long as they follow social distancing guidelines .
In his Twitter video , he also referenced a speech he ’ d given on July 4th where he addressed the importance of the First Amendment and first declared that San Luis Obispo County was to be a “ sanctuary county for worship and praise in church.
” “ Now more than ever in 2020 , we need more people attending their houses of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for an answer to the coronavirus , ” Dow said .
“ In that spirit , I ’ m calling on people of faith in our county and across our state , across our country and across the world , to pray for peace [ and ] healing .
”

And from Activist Mommy:
It’s always important to remember that we live in a federal republic. This means that we elect officials at local, county, state, and national levels to represent us and do our will.
Each of these elected officials is beholden to us, the voters, and to the Constitution that places the supreme power of our state in our hands.
Federal and state officials do not have the authority to supersede your rights, and every single elected official below any tyrant is morally bound to you, not to the tyrant violating your rights.
This important philosophical principle behind the function of our system is well exemplified in San Luis Obispo District Attorney Dan Dow, who has said he will not be prosecuting anyone for attending church services which, as The Christian Post notes, have been considered unlawful in most counties in California under Governor Gavin Newsom’s coronavirus orders.
“I declare San Luis Obispo County a sanctuary county for singing and praising in our houses of worship,” Dow said in a video he posted to Twitter. “Inherent with my responsibility to enforce the law is the discretion I have … to pursue only those charges that are warranted and are in the interest of justice.”
CP explains:
More than 30 counties in California are not allowed to gather for church services, according to Newsom’s order that places even greater restrictions on counties included in the state’s COVID-19 watch list.
Gatherings of 10 people or more in households in those counties are also banned, essentially prohibiting some in-home Bible study gatherings. Whether a church can legally gather or not, singing during worship is disallowed under Newsom’s order.
Churches in other counties not on the watch list are permitted to gather in limited capacities as long as they follow social distancing guidelines.
In his Twitter video, he also referenced a speech he’d given on July 4th where he addressed the importance of the First Amendment and first declared that San Luis Obispo County was to be a “sanctuary county for worship and praise in church.”
“Now more than ever in 2020, we need more people attending their houses of worship and seeking help from the Almighty for an answer to the coronavirus,” Dow said. “In that spirit, I’m calling on people of faith in our county and across our state, across our country and across the world, to pray for peace [and] healing.”


welovetrump--2020-08-14--President Trump Says New York Is “In Play” For The November Election

Glenn Beck over at The Blaze has more on the story : President Donald Trump believes that he has a chance at winning New York , a state that has voted blue in the presidential election for more than three decades .
`` But we 're putting New York in play , '' President Trump told the New York Post on Thursday .
`` We 're going to play it very strong and very hard .
And we are going to try to win New York . ''
Trump is confident in his chances of beating presumptive Democratic nominee Joe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spike in violence and high taxes .
Trump said that in New York City `` shootings are double , murders , everything has doubled and tripled .
And I 've heard numbers , 244 percent on some kinds of crimes .
What is it 277 percent [ for shootings ] ? ''
According to official NYPD crime stats , 49 shootings took place in New York City between July 7 and July 12 , nearly a 277 % increase compared to the 13 incidents that happened during the same period in 2019 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ this year was the deadliest and most violent June in 24 years , totaling 205 shooting incidents .
`` I think we have a very good chance , '' Trump said .
`` Who can be happy if you live in Manhattan and your taxes are going through the roof ?
And your quality of life is way down , and they 're defunding the police ? ''
`` I 'll solve the crime problem .
I 'll solve their tax problem .
I 'll solve all their problems , '' Trump said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ me ? ''
`` We 're going to look into SALT , we 're going to look into crime , we 're going to look into all of the things and solve the problems — of many problems that they have in New York , '' Trump added .
`` I will bring down taxes and I 'll make sure that New York City is a safe place , '' Trump claimed .
`` I mean , this is one of our cherished — this is a cherished diamond of this country .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to New York . ''
Peter Ajemian , the communications director for New York Gov .
Andrew Cuomo , reacted to the president 's statements by saying , `` President Trump needs to stop lying .
All income tax rates are lower today than when Governor Cuomo took office — the only person who raised New York State taxes was Trump with SALT . ''
Trump said he would spend money to win New York , and he would make campaign stops in the Empire State .
Trump also said he believes he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The president teased that he may make a push into New Jersey and `` perhaps at Virginia because they have a very , very strange governor . ''
The Trump campaign is also hopeful to flip some congressional seats as well .
`` The first thing I say is look at the congressional races , and New York , you 've got at least three , four , maybe even five competitive seats , '' White House political director Brian Jack said .
`` And some of those seats the president carried by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New York 11 , New York 19 , there 's quite a few opportunities in upstate as well . ''
`` I think we can pick up what , five seats ?
And that 's in addition to trying to win it , '' Trump added .
`` I think we can pick up a lot of seats . ''
Trump admitted that a Republican winning the state of New York would not be an easy task .
`` Over the last six months what 's happened is insane .
It 's insane @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very hard to win New York and that will be the first time — is that since Ronald Reagan , I guess ?
Since Ronald Reagan , '' Trump stated .
Since 1960 , a Republican presidential candidate has won New York three times : Richard Nixon in 1972 and Ronald Reagan in 1980 and 1984 .
Hillary Clinton defeated Trump in the 2016 battle for New York by capturing 59 % of the vote compared to Trump 's 36 % .
Trump won 40 counties statewide to Hillary Clinton 's 17 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ % of the votes in New York City , easily defeating Trump in all boroughs except for Staten Island .

Glenn Beck over at The Blaze has more on the story:
President Donald Trump believes that he has a chance at winning New York, a state that has voted blue in the presidential election for more than three decades.
"But we're putting New York in play," President Trump told the New York Post on Thursday. "We're going to play it very strong and very hard. And we are going to try to win New York."
Trump is confident in his chances of beating presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden in New York because of the spike in violence and high taxes. Trump said that in New York City "shootings are double, murders, everything has doubled and tripled. And I've heard numbers, 244 percent on some kinds of crimes. What is it 277 percent [for shootings]?"
According to official NYPD crime stats, 49 shootings took place in New York City between July 7 and July 12, nearly a 277% increase compared to the 13 incidents that happened during the same period in 2019. According to the NYPD, June of this year was the deadliest and most violent June in 24 years, totaling 205 shooting incidents.
"I think we have a very good chance," Trump said. "Who can be happy if you live in Manhattan and your taxes are going through the roof? And your quality of life is way down, and they're defunding the police?"
"I'll solve the crime problem. I'll solve their tax problem. I'll solve all their problems," Trump said. "Who would not vote for me?"
"We're going to look into SALT, we're going to look into crime, we're going to look into all of the things and solve the problems — of many problems that they have in New York," Trump added.
"I will bring down taxes and I'll make sure that New York City is a safe place," Trump claimed. "I mean, this is one of our cherished — this is a cherished diamond of this country. And we can't let this happen to New York."
Peter Ajemian, the communications director for New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, reacted to the president's statements by saying, "President Trump needs to stop lying. All income tax rates are lower today than when Governor Cuomo took office — the only person who raised New York State taxes was Trump with SALT."
Trump said he would spend money to win New York, and he would make campaign stops in the Empire State.
Trump also said he believes he will win New Mexico and Minnesota. The president teased that he may make a push into New Jersey and "perhaps at Virginia because they have a very, very strange governor."
The Trump campaign is also hopeful to flip some congressional seats as well.
"The first thing I say is look at the congressional races, and New York, you've got at least three, four, maybe even five competitive seats," White House political director Brian Jack said. "And some of those seats the president carried by very wide margins. You look at New York 11, New York 19, there's quite a few opportunities in upstate as well."
"I think we can pick up what, five seats? And that's in addition to trying to win it," Trump added. "I think we can pick up a lot of seats."
Trump admitted that a Republican winning the state of New York would not be an easy task.
"Over the last six months what's happened is insane. It's insane. So we're going to try very hard to win New York and that will be the first time — is that since Ronald Reagan, I guess? Since Ronald Reagan," Trump stated.
Since 1960, a Republican presidential candidate has won New York three times: Richard Nixon in 1972 and Ronald Reagan in 1980 and 1984.
Hillary Clinton defeated Trump in the 2016 battle for New York by capturing 59% of the vote compared to Trump's 36%. Trump won 40 counties statewide to Hillary Clinton's 17. However, Clinton took a whopping 79% of the votes in New York City, easily defeating Trump in all boroughs except for Staten Island.


welovetrump--2020-08-14--President Trump:  Your Social Security Is “Totally Protected” With Me

Even Bloomberg says Social Security is safe : One of the Democrats ’ favorite moments in any election cycle is when Republicans give them an opportunity to pretend that a serious plot to slash Social Security and Medicare is underway .
In 2017 , some remarks by Republican legislators were used to suggest that the programs for the elderly were about to be targeted .
This time it ’ s President Trump who handed Democrats the ammunition .
He was in Davos for an economic conference when Joe Kernan of CNBC asked him , “ Entitlements ever be on your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ At some point they will be.
” In his next few sentences , he seemed to be saying that a high rate of economic growth would make it easier to change the entitlement programs ( which are called that because current law entitles large numbers of Americans to benefits under them ) .
Senator Chuck Schumer , the Democratic leader , responded , “ Americans should hear that the president is casually talking about cutting their Social Security at a Swiss ski resort with the global financial elite.
” A Democratic SuperPAC promised @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his desire to cut Medicare and Social Security than over impeachment .
Trump beat a fighting retreat , tweeting that Democrats would destroy Social Security while he would save it .
Trump ’ s statement in Davos is fair game : He said what he said .
But that doesn ’ t mean that major changes to programs for the elderly in a second Trump term is a real prospect .
The administration has no plans to move on this front , and would not come close to succeeding if it did .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , “ I ’ m not going to cut Social Security like every other Republican and I ’ m not going to cut Medicare or Medicaid.
” Democrats say he has already broken that pledge .
Even during the campaign , he also said that he wanted to convert Medicaid into block grants to state governments — or , at least , his website did .
When he took office and the Republican Congress tried to repeal Obamacare , he backed proposals that would have made major changes to Medicaid and reduced projected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proposed reining in Social Security ’ s disability program .
Democrats portrayed the administration ’ s budget proposal last year as an $ 845 billion cut to Medicare .
That was an exaggeration .
The proposal would , among other things , have shifted some parts of Medicare into other parts of the federal budget .
It would also have undertaken various reforms — some of them supported by the Obama administration — to reduce spending without reducing benefit levels or increasing out-of-pocket costs for senior citizens .
Trump has from time to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to go further .
In addition to the Davos interview , he has mentioned this possibility to at least two Republican members of Congress who have spoken to me .
But this president says a lot of things from moment to moment , and not all of them amount to actual intentions .
The idea that President Trump will get re-elected promising to protect Social Security and Medicare and then make big cuts to them is , to use a technical term , nuts .
Even if he is re-elected , he will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House controlled by Democrats .
They would not cooperate with him on such cuts , and would in fact oppose them as a way of maximizing their gains in the 2022 elections .
Senate Democrats would also almost certainly keep enough seats to retain the power to filibuster ; they might even win a majority .
And since presidents usually lose ground in midterm elections , we can ’ t expect Trump ’ s legislative influence to increase thereafter .
For their part , congressional Republicans show very little appetite for a battle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want to relive their defeat in the legislative fight over Obamacare repeal .
Their voters seem unconcerned about high deficits as long as a Republican is in the White House .
They themselves feel no urgency to bring deficits down with interest rates as low as they are .
And it would be especially difficult to spur them to action after a campaign in which the president was silent , or defensive , on the issue .
Changes to Medicare and Social Security would be less likely to happen under a re-elected Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Michael Bloomberg , Pete Buttigieg , or Amy Klobuchar — and even under one of them , such legislation would be a longshot .
( Bloomberg is founder and majority owner of Bloomberg LP , the parent company of Bloomberg News . )

Even Bloomberg says Social Security is safe:
One of the Democrats’ favorite moments in any election cycle is when Republicans give them an opportunity to pretend that a serious plot to slash Social Security and Medicare is underway. In 2017, some remarks by Republican legislators were used to suggest that the programs for the elderly were about to be targeted.
This time it’s President Trump who handed Democrats the ammunition. He was in Davos for an economic conference when Joe Kernan of CNBC asked him, “Entitlements ever be on your plate?” His answer: “At some point they will be.” In his next few sentences, he seemed to be saying that a high rate of economic growth would make it easier to change the entitlement programs (which are called that because current law entitles large numbers of Americans to benefits under them).
Senator Chuck Schumer, the Democratic leader, responded, “Americans should hear that the president is casually talking about cutting their Social Security at a Swiss ski resort with the global financial elite.” A Democratic SuperPAC promised that more ads will hit Trump over his desire to cut Medicare and Social Security than over impeachment. Trump beat a fighting retreat, tweeting that Democrats would destroy Social Security while he would save it.
Trump’s statement in Davos is fair game: He said what he said. But that doesn’t mean that major changes to programs for the elderly in a second Trump term is a real prospect. The administration has no plans to move on this front, and would not come close to succeeding if it did.
During the 2016 campaign, Trump said, “I’m not going to cut Social Security like every other Republican and I’m not going to cut Medicare or Medicaid.” Democrats say he has already broken that pledge. Even during the campaign, he also said that he wanted to convert Medicaid into block grants to state governments — or, at least, his website did. When he took office and the Republican Congress tried to repeal Obamacare, he backed proposals that would have made major changes to Medicaid and reduced projected spending on it. His administration has proposed reining in Social Security’s disability program.
Democrats portrayed the administration’s budget proposal last year as an $845 billion cut to Medicare. That was an exaggeration. The proposal would, among other things, have shifted some parts of Medicare into other parts of the federal budget. It would also have undertaken various reforms — some of them supported by the Obama administration — to reduce spending without reducing benefit levels or increasing out-of-pocket costs for senior citizens.
Trump has from time to time hinted that he would be willing to go further. In addition to the Davos interview, he has mentioned this possibility to at least two Republican members of Congress who have spoken to me.
But this president says a lot of things from moment to moment, and not all of them amount to actual intentions. The idea that President Trump will get re-elected promising to protect Social Security and Medicare and then make big cuts to them is, to use a technical term, nuts.
Even if he is re-elected, he will almost certainly have to contend with a House controlled by Democrats. They would not cooperate with him on such cuts, and would in fact oppose them as a way of maximizing their gains in the 2022 elections. Senate Democrats would also almost certainly keep enough seats to retain the power to filibuster; they might even win a majority. And since presidents usually lose ground in midterm elections, we can’t expect Trump’s legislative influence to increase thereafter.
For their part, congressional Republicans show very little appetite for a battle over entitlements. They don’t want to relive their defeat in the legislative fight over Obamacare repeal. Their voters seem unconcerned about high deficits as long as a Republican is in the White House. They themselves feel no urgency to bring deficits down with interest rates as low as they are. And it would be especially difficult to spur them to action after a campaign in which the president was silent, or defensive, on the issue.
Changes to Medicare and Social Security would be less likely to happen under a re-elected Trump than under a newly elected Joe Biden, Michael Bloomberg, Pete Buttigieg, or Amy Klobuchar — and even under one of them, such legislation would be a longshot. (Bloomberg is founder and majority owner of Bloomberg LP, the parent company of Bloomberg News.)


welovetrump--2020-08-14--First Durham BOMBSHELL Drops: Ex-FBI Lawyer to Plead GUILTY

Is this the development we were waiting for ?
Earlier today , we reported that AG Bill Barr confirmed that @ @ @ @ @ today on the Durham probe .
Well , we have the inside scoop on the @ @ @ @ @ been confirmed that an ex-FBI lawyer is expected to plead GUILTY in review of the @ @ @ @ @ also being reported that this same official doctored an email that was used in the @ @ @ @ @ .
The shoes are finally beginning to drop .
What other revelations will we find @ @ @ @ @

Is this the development we were waiting for?
Earlier today, we reported that AG Bill Barr confirmed that there will be a development today on the Durham probe.
Well, we have the inside scoop on the latest breaking news…
It has been confirmed that an ex-FBI lawyer is expected to plead GUILTY in review of the Russia inquiry.
It is also being reported that this same official doctored an email that was used in the Carter Page FISA warrant application.
WOW.
The shoes are finally beginning to drop.
What other revelations will we find in the Durham probe?
More details below:


welovetrump--2020-08-14--Dolly Parton: “Do we think our little white asses are the only ones that matter? No!”

It turns out that Dolly also renamed `` The Dixie Stampede '' to `` Dolly Parton 's Stampede . ''
It 's a show that features dinner with a liver performance with human actors and horses .
Flexibility benefits Parton in other ways .
In 2018 she renamed her Dixie Stampede dinner attraction Dolly Parton ’ s Stampede as she became more aware of how hurtful the term “ Dixie ” and its associations with the Confederacy could be — perhaps because of a 2017 Slate article that cast a critical eye on its rosy , family-friendly depictions of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the Dollywood Company said it was also eyeing an international expansion and noted that “ Dixie ” wouldn ’ t translate abroad . )
“ There ’ s such a thing as innocent ignorance , and so many of us are guilty of that , ” she says now .
“ When they said ‘ Dixie ’ was an offensive word , I thought , ‘ Well , I don ’ t want to offend anybody .
This is a business .
We ’ ll just call it The Stampede.
’ As @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ] is a problem , you should fix it .
Don ’ t be a dumbass .
That ’ s where my heart is .
I would never dream of hurting anybody on purpose.
” The change came two years before the police killings of unarmed Black Americans like George Floyd sparked a reckoning with systemic racism in the United States — one that led country acts such as the Dixie Chicks and Lady Antebellum to change their names to similarly avoid glorifying dark chapters of history .
Parton hasn ’ t attended @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unequivocal in her support of protestors and the Black Lives Matter movement .
“ I understand people having to make themselves known and felt and seen , ” she says .
“ And of course Black lives matter .
Do we think our little white asses are the only ones that matter ?
No !
” This is perhaps one secret to Parton ’ s widespread appeal : Just because she wants to be for everyone doesn ’ t mean she doesn ’ t stand for anything .
Offending as few potential customers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But when Parton explains the philosophies that drive her life and career , her answers are hardly corporate .
“ First of all , I ’ m not a judgmental person .
I do believe we all have a right to be exactly who we are , and it is not my place to judge , ” she says .
“ All these good Christian people that are supposed to be such good Christian people , the last thing we ’ re supposed to do is to judge one another .
God is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just try to be myself .
I try to let everybody else be themselves .
”

It turns out that Dolly also renamed "The Dixie Stampede" to "Dolly Parton's Stampede."
It's a show that features dinner with a liver performance with human actors and horses.
According to Billboard:
Flexibility benefits Parton in other ways. In 2018 she renamed her Dixie Stampede dinner attraction Dolly Parton’s Stampede as she became more aware of how hurtful the term “Dixie” and its associations with the Confederacy could be — perhaps because of a 2017 Slate article that cast a critical eye on its rosy, family-friendly depictions of the Civil War. (At the time, the Dollywood Company said it was also eyeing an international expansion and noted that “Dixie” wouldn’t translate abroad.) “There’s such a thing as innocent ignorance, and so many of us are guilty of that,” she says now. “When they said ‘Dixie’ was an offensive word, I thought, ‘Well, I don’t want to offend anybody. This is a business. We’ll just call it The Stampede.’ As soon as you realize that [something] is a problem, you should fix it. Don’t be a dumbass. That’s where my heart is. I would never dream of hurting anybody on purpose.”
The change came two years before the police killings of unarmed Black Americans like George Floyd sparked a reckoning with systemic racism in the United States — one that led country acts such as the Dixie Chicks and Lady Antebellum to change their names to similarly avoid glorifying dark chapters of history. Parton hasn’t attended any recent marches, but she is unequivocal in her support of protestors and the Black Lives Matter movement. “I understand people having to make themselves known and felt and seen,” she says. “And of course Black lives matter. Do we think our little white asses are the only ones that matter? No!”
This is perhaps one secret to Parton’s widespread appeal: Just because she wants to be for everyone doesn’t mean she doesn’t stand for anything. Offending as few potential customers as possible is just good business. But when Parton explains the philosophies that drive her life and career, her answers are hardly corporate. “First of all, I’m not a judgmental person. I do believe we all have a right to be exactly who we are, and it is not my place to judge,” she says. “All these good Christian people that are supposed to be such good Christian people, the last thing we’re supposed to do is to judge one another. God is the judge, not us. I just try to be myself. I try to let everybody else be themselves.”


welovetrump--2020-08-14--LSU Head Coach Ed Orgeron Says Trump Has Done a Fantastic Job

Finally , someone in the sports world who expresses support for our President .
LSU head coach Ed Orgeron has openly stated that he thinks President Trump is doing a fantastic job .
Let ’ s hope that coach Orgeron doesn ’ t get canceled by the cancel culture , I ’ m sure the radical left is digging deep into archives somewhere to try to find some dirt on coach O .
Fox News reported the conversation of Coach Orgeron and President Trump : Earlier in the week , Trump gave his support for the players ’ movement expressing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ amid the coronavirus outbreak that is still plaguing the U.S. Lawrence is among the leaders of the # WeWantToPlay movement calling on conferences and colleges to not cancel their seasons .
Trump said Orgeron “ feels his players just want to be out there.
” Oregon expressed the same sentiment Tuesday in an interview on Fox News Channel ’ s “ America ’ s Newsroom.
” The president explained in an interview with Outkick ’ s Clay Travis on Tuesday that college football ’ s cancelation would be a “ tragic mistake ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because the college football athletes are in good shape , they would have less of a chance to contract the coronavirus and he didn ’ t expect them to have any issues with it .
Of course , after you say anything positive about Trump you will receive some backlash , see what a former player said about coach O .
The Spun published an article of a former LSU player talking down on Coach O : LSU football coach Ed Orgeron is by all accounts well respected by his current and former @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mean one won ’ t call him out for something he did .
In the case of former Tigers star K ’ Lavon Chaisson , Orgeron ’ s support for President Donald Trump was enough to merit a response .
In an appearance on FOX News this morning to discuss the state of college football , Orgeron was asked about President Trump mentioning him in a radio interview today .
“ It makes me proud , ” Orgeron said .
“ I love President Trump .
He treated us very well when we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think he ’ s doing a fantastic job.
” Chaisson , who is heading into his first NFL season as a member of the Jacksonville Jaguars , criticized his old coach ’ s assessment of the President , saying that while Orgeron is a “ great man ” , he is “ blind to everything else.
” “ Coach O is a great man and I know he didn ’ t mean any harm by this but he is the definition of only know and care about football , ” Chaisson wrote .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Fantastic job ?
?
” In the days we are living in if you ’ re a celebrity or well-known watch out because any compliment of our President will land you hate from the radical left .
Do you agree with President Trump and Coach O about College Football shouldn ’ t be canceled ?

We may receive compensation from affiliate partners for some links on this site. Read our full Disclosure here
899 views
Finally, someone in the sports world who expresses support for our President.
LSU head coach Ed Orgeron has openly stated that he thinks President Trump is doing a fantastic job.
Let’s hope that coach Orgeron doesn’t get canceled by the cancel culture, I’m sure the radical left is digging deep into archives somewhere to try to find some dirt on coach O.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1293937233037230080
There's no 'Plan B' at LSU according to Coach O, who is also a big fan of Donald Trump: https://t.co/sklkDUEFW6 pic.twitter.com/yN1UzDrBie — Brad Crawford (@BCrawford247) August 11, 2020
Fox News reported the conversation of Coach Orgeron and President Trump:
Earlier in the week, Trump gave his support for the players’ movement expressing their desire to play football this season amid the coronavirus outbreak that is still plaguing the U.S. Lawrence is among the leaders of the #WeWantToPlay movement calling on conferences and colleges to not cancel their seasons. Trump said Orgeron “feels his players just want to be out there.” Oregon expressed the same sentiment Tuesday in an interview on Fox News Channel’s “America’s Newsroom.” The president explained in an interview with Outkick’s Clay Travis on Tuesday that college football’s cancelation would be a “tragic mistake” Trump, citing a doctor, said because the college football athletes are in good shape, they would have less of a chance to contract the coronavirus and he didn’t expect them to have any issues with it.
NEW: President Trump talks college football He says he spoke to “Trevor” and “Coach O.” “They feel safer on the field than they do walking around and doing nothing.” pic.twitter.com/iAPkhcLGlu — Andy Slater (@AndySlater) August 12, 2020
"Makes me proud," Orgeron said of Trump's comments. "I love President Trump. He treated us very well when we went to the White House. And I think he's doing a fantastic job." — Glenn Guilbeau (@LSUBeatTweet) August 11, 2020
Of course, after you say anything positive about Trump you will receive some backlash, see what a former player said about coach O.
https://twitter.com/S4CKGURU/status/1293288902384594944
The Spun published an article of a former LSU player talking down on Coach O:
LSU football coach Ed Orgeron is by all accounts well respected by his current and former players, but that doesn’t mean one won’t call him out for something he did. In the case of former Tigers star K’Lavon Chaisson, Orgeron’s support for President Donald Trump was enough to merit a response. In an appearance on FOX News this morning to discuss the state of college football, Orgeron was asked about President Trump mentioning him in a radio interview today. “It makes me proud,” Orgeron said. “I love President Trump. He treated us very well when we went to the White House. I think he’s doing a fantastic job.” Chaisson, who is heading into his first NFL season as a member of the Jacksonville Jaguars, criticized his old coach’s assessment of the President, saying that while Orgeron is a “great man”, he is “blind to everything else.” “Coach O is a great man and I know he didn’t mean any harm by this but he is the definition of only know and care about football,” Chaisson wrote. “He is blind to everything else. Fantastic job??”
In the days we are living in if you’re a celebrity or well-known watch out because any compliment of our President will land you hate from the radical left.
Do you agree with President Trump and Coach O about College Football shouldn’t be canceled?